New record for Luton.

[LTNman]

Around 809,000 passengers used Luton in August up nearly 100,000 from 712,039 for August 2003. This is the first time LTN has broken the 800,000 barrier beating the previous record of 749,462 set last month.

[Jerricho]

Time for that second runway then? ;)

[SHTTKR]

Never mind the runway , Dual carraigeway is what it needs :p

[LTNman]

TBI need to focus their attention and money on their key airport. Luton has just been voted the UK’s most unpopular airport. The short-term car park is a disgrace with potholes everywhere. The arrivals hall is grossly overcrowded with just 4 baggage belts and a look straight out of the 70’s. The central area is often grid locked due to there being only one entry barrier to the drop off zone and the shuttle buses to the station are often standing room only.

The new terminal with its 60 check-in desks has a capacity of around 10 million. With passenger figures climbing slowly over the last 2 or 3 years this capacity seemed a long way off but now it appears that 10 million could be achieved in only the next 2 or 3 years.

TBI need a proper 5 and 10-year plan, which means spending real money ahead of demand to help create demand. This means sending in planning applications for expanding the existing terminal or building a new terminal together with new aprons now. The anti Luton movement have wised up after they got duped when the planning application for the existing new terminal was passed without a public enquiry as it was only meant to have a capacity of 5 million. They started to ask questions when this year on year figure was passed on day one of the terminal opening so won’t be caught out the second time and will push for a public enquiry.

The good news is that the new dual carriageway into the airport will be started in the New Year and should be finished around the same time as the widening of the M1 but then that has nothing to do with TBI

[Avro Arrow]

LTN Man

I thought you worked for TBI/LLA but your last post clearly shows that you don't. I have been to briefings given by the airport management team and supported by LBC at which is was clearly stated that the only planning condition attached to the airport is the 1984 noise contour.

The current terminal has the ability to cope within in excess of 10m pax and the planners recognise this. The airport has existing planning permission for two new piers and for additional car parking, stands and the development of the first floor of the the terminal building. I understand the work starts on Monday as we received an email from the company on Friday confirming.

The road by the way was instigated by Blair not for the airport but as an injection of cash to be seen to be doing something for Luton following the demise of Vauxhall/GM. The airport will of course directly benefit. Likewise the recently announced Translink.

I have seen a 5 year and 10 year and 20mppa plan which you could too - it's a public document lodged with planners and with John Prescott's planning office - its also referred to on the airport website. The only change to that plan are impacts brought about by the developments noted in the UK Aviation White paper.

I seem to remember that in a previous post you have made comments about TBI pouring in money to create market demand. It's obvious that you weren't around or have forgotten that BAA built a big white elephant which they thought would create market demand but nothing happened - so they had to nick Luton's low cost business with a sweetheat deal for FR. You can ask RG and FP about that cos it happened on their watch. So you can't be a marketer either.

We rarely complain to TBI about spending money because we and our pax have to pay for it. At STN and LGW despite the start up deals, the CAA regulator sets the return on capital BAA can make. This is why BAA can pour concrete at any price - we have to pay whether we like it or not - check out BMI's MB, BY's KH and MOL's comments re BAA charges.

The other thing about creating demand is that airports don't airlines do that's why we spend a fortune advertising our deals in the press. LCC/NFCs do stimulate demand and others have to respond.

As an airline we can turn on and turn off capacity very quickly - in fact almost overnight - check out several French Airports and latterly Zurich. Airports capital planning takes time and resources. As a NFC we wouldn't want to pay any more than we had too for anything.

What Luton needs is a parallel taxiway cos the backtracking is become a might wearisome at peak periods - I know that's in the Master Plan cos I've see that too - what I don't know is precisely when (the current movement limit is c. 30/hr) but perhaps someone could tell me. What is also needed is to get rid of the buses between the rail station and the airport - build a fixed link if it can be afforded - now that is something where TBI could be creative.

AA

[codpiece face]

In the late 80's early 90's luton was a delight to fly from compared to many of its competitors. The main problem now from a pax point of view is the way that many buildings have been thrown together there is no logic in the way the terminals or road systems operate.

Luton need to stop putting in temp measures that turn in to permanent fixtures ( and this is nothing new as it has been happening for 20 years that i remember ).

TBI need to splash the cash put in some decent infrastructure and i am convinced they will see a rapid return on their money, who really wants to fly to rural essex or crawley anyway.

[LTNman]

The current terminal has the ability to cope within in excess of 10m pax and the planners recognise this. The airport has existing planning permission for two new piers and for additional car parking, stands and the development of the first floor of the terminal building. I understand the work starts on Monday as we received an email from the company on Friday confirming.

The original planning permission associated with the construction of the new terminal shows the two piers and the completed first floor. Further planning permission was granted a few years later for a new immigration hall. I’m not aware of a planning application or permission for a new apron apart from the Harrods work nor am I aware of a planning application for a new car park although land had been earmarked.

So the questions are:

1/ Will the building work include a new immigration hall? When is the completion date?
2/ Has a planning application gone in for a new apron? If so where and when will that work be started?
3/ Where is the new car park going and when is that work going to be started?
4/ What is going to be done about the gridlock in the central area?
5/ TBI were seeking a grant for another feasibility study regarding a monorail type link to the station. Anything happening on that front?
6/ When is the easyTent being moved to free up two stands?

[nickmanl]

"The road by the way was instigated by Blair not for the airport but as an injection of cash to be seen to be doing something for Luton following the demise of Vauxhall/GM. The airport will of course directly benefit. Likewise the recently announced Translink."

Translink is something I very much doubt will happen. Lutonians don't want it. Its a waste of money. The buses are good enough at getting people into central luton. People would much rather see the disused railway become a railway again, not a bus lane!

LTN Man, I heard somewhere a long time ago that isn't the Vauxhall site going to become a car park or has this now been sold for residential development?

Does anyone else feel TBI are out of their depth now? I mean they don't even actually own the airport. They are merely running it on behalf of Luton Borough Council. They announced they would be raising £20 million to improve Luton, but this figure doesn't seem nowhere near enough. Luton is crying out for new arrivals halls, a parallel taxi way plus a monorail type 'thingy' to Luton Parkway Railway station!

[CAP670]

quote:
___________________________________________________

"What Luton needs is a parallel taxiway cos the backtracking is become a might wearisome at peak periods - I know that's in the Master Plan cos I've see that too - what I don't know is precisely when (the current movement limit is c. 30/hr) but perhaps someone could tell me."
___________________________________________________

The hourly movement rate declared by TBI/LLAO is 32/60; this is the figure used by ACL when aportioning runway 'slots'. A parallel taxiway would only improve on this movement rate if the airspace and route structure was fundamentally changed whereby ATC could use a one-minute departure rate such is done at LGW, LHR, STN, etc. This would require considerable time and effort by the CAA and NATS as some routes would need to be changed and this introduces the big 'E & P' (Environment & [the] Public). Luton ATC operates with six-mile arrival spacing at touchdown to accommodate most departures - this compares with five or four miles at for example, Gatwick and Stansted for similar aircraft types, and so is pretty impressive, given the backtrack requirement at Luton.

The improvements required at Luton to operate at 8M + pax/year all come under the 'Infrastructure' heading:

1. Improved pax processing inbound and outbound
2. Improved approach roads & road access to the Terminal
3. Improved local roads i.e. A505 and link from M1 J10A (apparently, the Department for Transport isn't now going for a flyover at J10A despite being able to justify similar public expenditure at other [BAA] airports...)
4. Improved local airspace and route structure including sorting out the inbound mess where STN and LTN share the same hold, and the outbound mess where London City or Northolt departing flights can simply stop all Luton's departing aircraft
5. Improved access to the nearby railway station which isn't that bad, but is situated on the wrong side of the railway line!

TBI may well fund 1 and 2 but it doesn't have the remit to take on the other issues. In particular, 3 and 5 should be tackled jointly by the DfT, Bedfordshire County Council and LBC.

We're still waiting: so go on chaps, surprise us...

:ooh:

[Buster the Bear]

http://www.london-luton.co.uk/pdf/download/SERAS2-Diagrams.PDF
http://whipsnade.co.uk/picturelibrary/jpeg150/br/brown_bear_120_wide.jpg

[LTNman]

I have seen these plans before. While the extra aprons will be built around taxiway Delta at some time I can’t ever see TBI extending the runway to 3000m. The cost would be enormous as the land drops away sharply at the 26 end and I am sure Ryanair and easyjet would moan like hell that their passengers would be paying for extra runway length that their aircraft don’t need. I’m also sure TBI know that they would get a better return on their money and less hassle by adding more stands and terminal space than they would from trying to attract the odd larger aircraft that would need that extra 840m of runway.

What the plans do show is that there is enough room within airport boundaries for a further 12 x 767 type remote stands or 16 x 737 remote stands without ripping up the car parks by placing them on the far side of Taxiway Delta or a further 21 x 767/ 28 x 737 stands by ripping up the short term and staff car parks, knocking down easyland and the Harrods terminal and using the south stands as further 767/737 stands. If they went down this route the central area would loose all of its car parking so would create many problems but would allow space for a new terminal and new piers so passengers could walk to their aircraft.

After that the airport would need to move airport boundaries south into Hertfordshire farmland. It is likely that the County and Town boundaries are going to be realigned to encompass more Hertfordshire land that has been reserved for Luton housing just to the north of the airport so it wouldn’t take much ink to realigned the boundary around a bigger airport.